This Is A Very Revealing Quote About The Current Dark State Of The Republican Party (2 Viewers)

[Kerry Won Ohio]

God help us if the Republican Party is ever in power again. This is what a Republican official in Pennsylvania apparently said yesterday. --

David Ball, the chair of the Washington County GOP, vented his anger at Sen. Pat Toomey, fellow Republican of Pennsylvania, who committed the apostasy of joining six other GOP senators in voting to convict former president Donald Trump of inciting insurrection.

“We did not send him (Sen Toomey) there to vote his conscience,” Ball said on Monday. “We did not send him there to do the right thing or whatever he said he was doing. We sent him there to represent us.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/16/david-ball-toomey-pennsylvania-gop/

This tells you everything you need to know about the current evil, fascist nature of the Republican Party. They must NEVER control Congress or the White House ever again. If they do, democracy is over in this country.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

So a one party rule is better suited for you? Perhaps you'd like it to become law? How is democracy going to be over if the Republican party regains the government, wouldn't that be an fine example of democracy? What do you call gerrymandering who can vote?

When one party is crazy, lives in a fantasy world devoid of facts, and is full of white supremacists like the Repug Party, then, yes, one party rule is better.

A healthy democracy needs at least two political parties. Since the Repug Party is currently forking crazy, we don't have that right now.

And democracy will be over because the Repug Party no longer believes in democracy. That became obvious on January 6th, when 139 Republicans voted to overturn the election results.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

That is desperate, really. You can find this crap all over this country by both sides. Answer my questions and quit deflecting. Hell, the RINO party gerrymandered LT COL West's district in Florida to give over to Dems! There was talk in the D party about doing that to AOC but Nervous Nancy decided to try and use her instead. AOC's mouth may be moving, but it's Nancy talking.

Actually, you can't. Republicans are far more egregious when it comes to gerrymandering. They don't have a choice really, since their policies are so forking horrible that most Americans won't vote for them.

 

[barbar]

Interesting. Do you regard patriotism as an inherently bad thing ?

Meant nationalism more than patriotism.

It's fine to be a Patriot but what we are seeing now is not patriotism.

A Patriot would see the problems and want to fix them because they want the country to be it's best and work for everyone. A nationalist resists all change because the country is already perfect and is the best country in the world. Just keep waiving the flag and burying their heads in the sand.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

I liken it to when people in the past have questioned my 'loyalty' as a Saints fan (WRONG FORUM ALERT!): You can be critical of your favorite team and still have it be your favorite team. It's the whole issue with kneeling for the anthem -- people are too quick to go nuts because everyone doesn't automatically conform to what is effectively a loyalty oath.

I daresay most of those Trump supporters you see who dress like an American flag vomited on them would fail a basic civics test.

 

[Roofgardener]

Meant nationalism more than patriotism.

It's fine to be a Patriot but what we are seeing now is not patriotism.

A Patriot would see the problems and want to fix them because they want the country to be it's best and work for everyone. A nationalist resists all change because the country is already perfect and is the best country in the world. Just keep waiving the flag and burying their heads in the sand.

That seems a rather... odd.. definition of Nationalism, Barbar. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as...

Nationalism: noun: identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

It doesn't say anything about resisting change.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

That seems a rather... odd.. definition of Nationalism, Barbar. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as...

Nationalism: noun: identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

It doesn't say anything about resisting change.

separatism, secessionism, partitionism, isolationism, patriotism, patriotic sentiment, allegiance to one's country, loyalty to one's country, loyalism, nationality
xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism, flag-waving, ethnocentrism, ethnocentricity

These are the synonyms that your cited dictionary uses
Resistance to change seems embedded in most of those ideas

 

[Roofgardener]

I'd disagree that most of those terms are synonyms of Nationalism ? They may be related, but they are not the same thing ? (for example, xenophobia, chauvinism, ethnocentrism etc do not have the same meaning as nationalism), so I still think that resistance to change is NOT a feature of nationalism. (though, obviously, and individual nationalist COULD be resistant to change). That condition seems more related to Conservatism, in its true meaning ?

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

I'd disagree that most of those terms are synonyms of Nationalism ? They may be related, but they are not the same thing ? (for example, xenophobia, chauvinism, ethnocentrism etc do not have the same meaning as nationalism), so I still think that resistance to change is NOT a feature of nationalism. (though, obviously, and individual nationalist COULD be resistant to change). That condition seems more related to Conservatism, in its true meaning ?

you cite the definition of nationalism from the oxford dictionary (lexico.com)
the synonyms i listed were taken from that same site

that being said barbar described a very real dynamic in the States that is one of the chief reasons America continues to lose ground internationally
if the venn diagram of nationalism and what barbar describes is not a perfect circle, then it's just off by matters of degree and the difference is quite an unnecessary rhetorical quibble

 

[Sandman]

I agree. I mean.. the idea that a representative should be asked to represent his constituents, and not just his own individual beliefs, is just fascist, racist, transphobic, and probably fattening.

That is simplistic thinking. I grew up in Birmingham, Alabama in the 70s. I would say a great majority of the people there wanted to retain (the constituents) wanted to maintain segregation. Was it right for their elected officials to support their constituents views, or should they have been more respectful of the Constitution? To me, the answer is clear. Sometimes as an elected official you have to recognize that your constituents are wrong and the best way to truly represent them is to vote against their beliefs.

 

[MT15]

And that’s how you separate true leaders from those who entered politics for the money or the attention and perks they receive. Or simply to wield power over others. At least that is how I look at it.

We’ve had numerous examples of leadership from both parties in the past. Today‘s Republicans have certainly had their struggles with leadership though. They have run scared.

 

[bird]

One definition of a leader is someone who is willing to wreck his/her career by doing what is right.

 

[DaveXA]

you cite the definition of nationalism from the oxford dictionary (lexico.com)
the synonyms i listed were taken from that same site

that being said barbar described a very real dynamic in the States that is one of the chief reasons America continues to lose ground internationally
if the venn diagram of nationalism and what barbar describes is not a perfect circle, then it's just off by matters of degree and the difference is quite an unnecessary rhetorical quibble

The nationalism espoused by Trump disgusted me. I never liked the maga slogan and never liked the put America first sentiment. This has hurt our relationships with our traditional allies and I think backed us into a corner on several global issues.

I love our country, but my view is that we should be willing to be good citizens of the world and use our considerable resources to assist countries in need and not be a bully. Walk softly and carry a big stick and all that.

 

[insidejob]

The nationalism espoused by Trump disgusted me. I never liked the maga slogan and never liked the put America first sentiment. This has hurt our relationships with our traditional allies and I think backed us into a corner on several global issues.

I love our country, but my view is that we should be willing to be good citizens of the world and use our considerable resources to assist countries in need and not be a bully. Walk softly and carry a big stick and all that.

It looks like our long time traditional allies just held their nose and prayed while Trump was president because it doesn't seem like Biden is getting the cold shoulder from anyone Trump offended or basically cut ties with. (That we know of at least...)

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

One definition of a leader is someone who is willing to wreck his/her career by doing what is right.

it's a nice definition, but Jimmy Carter is probably the shining example of that and it's hard to describe him as a leader -
even though a tremendous amount of our current issues - both in terms of energy and foreign affairs - are the direct and indirect result in not listening to him
i would argue Carter is more a moral compass than leader

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

The nationalism espoused by Trump disgusted me. I never liked the maga slogan and never liked the put America first sentiment. This has hurt our relationships with our traditional allies and I think backed us into a corner on several global issues.

I love our country, but my view is that we should be willing to be good citizens of the world and use our considerable resources to assist countries in need and not be a bully. Walk softly and carry a big stick and all that.

it reminds me of parents of high school students whose sole purpose seems to be protecting their children from the consequences of their bad behavior and bad performance in class
absolutely no one benefits from the bad getting papered over (least of all the kids)
but what is power if you don't use it?

 

[DaveXA]

it reminds me of parents of high school students whose sole purpose seems to be protecting their children from the consequences of their bad behavior and bad performance in class
absolutely no one benefits from the bad getting papered over (least of all the kids)
but what is power if you don't use it?

Sure, but certainly, the US has more than enough implied power (big stick) that she ordinarily wouldn't need to use it (walk softly). But when you have all that power and act like a bully, well, the last administration is what you get.

And fwiw, the US actually does use that implied power, probably too much.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

Sure, but certainly, the US has more than enough implied power (big stick) that she ordinarily wouldn't need to use it (walk softly). But when you have all that power and act like a bully, well, the last administration is what you get.

And fwiw, the US actually does use that implied power, probably too much.

Yes we use military power like those HS families use financial power
The problem is the more coercive power is used, the more cultural power we lose
- I don’t think they are inversely linked. There was a time when we led in both
But the more we relied on the big stick, we just got lazy or myopic or whatever

 

[brandon]

That is simplistic thinking. I grew up in Birmingham, Alabama in the 70s. I would say a great majority of the people there wanted to retain (the constituents) wanted to maintain segregation. Was it right for their elected officials to support their constituents views, or should they have been more respectful of the Constitution? To me, the answer is clear. Sometimes as an elected official you have to recognize that your constituents are wrong and the best way to truly represent them is to vote against their beliefs.

This is why it usually falls on the Supreme Court to strike down unconstitutional laws, as the legislature doesn't have the guts to change laws due to having to answer to their constituents.

If Mississippi had been left up to its voters or legislature as to whether or not to abolish slavery...we might still have slavery.